@lcghedlf: "SOCIAL SECURITY:
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA)
Program.  He promised: 
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary, 
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first
$1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program, 
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program
would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year, 
4.) That the money the participants put into the independent "Trust
Fund" rather than into the General operating fund, and therefore,
would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and
no other Government program, and, 
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as
income.  
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a
Social Security check every month  and then finding that we are
getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to
"put away," you may be interested in the following: 
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent
"Trust" fund and put it into the General fund so that Congress could
spend it?  
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratic-controlled House and
Senate.  
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for
Social Security (FICA) withholding?  
A: The Democrat Party.  
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?  
A: The Democrat Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking"
deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President
of the U.S.  
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to
immigrants?  
A: That's right!  Jimmy Carter and the Democrat Party.  Immigrants
moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive SSI Social
Security payments!  The Democrats gave these payments to them, even
though they never paid a dime into it!  
Then, after lying about it the facts and violating the original
contract (FICA), the Democrats tell you that the Republicans want to
take your Social Security away!  
And the worst part about it is, uninformed citizens believe it!  
Perhaps we are asking the wrong questions during this 2004 election
year!  
If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be
planted and maybe good changes will evolve.  
Keep this going clear up through the 2004 election!!  This needs to be
heard.  
- -
Protect your civil rights!
Let the politicians know how you feel.
Join or donate to the NRA today!
<url>"
    @lcghedlf: "<quote>
There is a difference between hyperbole and a promise.
-dan z-
- -
Protect your civil rights!
Let the politicians know how you feel.
Join or donate to the NRA today!
<url>"
    @sales: "<quote>
  I guess politicians are the same everywhere...
== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==
<url> The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
-= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =-
== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==
<url> The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
-= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =-"
    @shakka: "The NRA?  Wasn't that the hate group that called American law
enforcement agents "jack-booted thugs?"  And didn't President Reagan,
a Republican, quit the NRA in disgust?  
On Thu, 20 May 2004 16:58:43 -0400, slate_leeper <<email_address>
<quote>"
    @pauls1: "<quote>
They were quoting a member of Congress (happened to be a democrat)
who called BATF agents "jack-booted thugs" when he made a comment
on BATF actions.
It was George Bush, and he made that public withdrawal from the
NRA (which he joined after deciding to run from public office)
after he lost his attempt for a second term as president.  The NRA
had refused to endorse him, because of his (first-term) anti-gun
executive order banning importation of certain firearms.
Paul Stevens
Bill 'n' Opus in 2004"
    @chess88: " Subject: Tell Congress to protect Social Security
Dear friend:
George Bush and Republican leaders have made phasing out Social Security 
through privatization and massive benefit cuts their top priority for 2005. 
Members of Congress are choosing sides over the next couple of weeks.
We need to make sure they choose correctly now-before a massive 
election-style campaign by George Bush and the Wall Street interests gets to 
them including what might be a $100 million TV ad campaign.
MoveOn's trying to gather 200,000 signatures to present to lawmakers when 
they return after the inauguration. You can sign the petition now at:
<url>
Social Security is a complicated issue, but the basics are really pretty 
simple:
  � Social Security provides monthly benefits to some 44 million Americans 
who are retired, disabled or the survivor of a deceased parent. It provides 
most of the income for older Americanssome 64 percent of their support. It 
has lifted generations of seniors out of poverty.
  � Social Security is not in crisis. That is an outright lie perpetrated in 
order to create the urgency for radical changes. Under conservative 
forecasts, the long-term challenges in Social Security do not manifest 
themselves until 2042. Even then Social Security has 70 percent of needed 
funds. That shortfall is smaller than the amount needed in 1983, the last 
time we overhauled Social Security. George Bush's Social Security 
crisis-talk is an effort to create a specter of doom  just like the 
weapons of mass destruction claim in Iraq.
  � Phasing out Social Security and replacing it with privatized accounts 
means one thing: massive cuts in monthly benefits for everybody. Social 
Security privatization requires diverting taxes used to pay current benefits 
into privatized accounts invested in risky stocks. Without that money Social 
Security benefits will inevitably be cut  some proposals even cut benefits 
of current retirees. These benefit cuts are inevitable, since diverting 
Social Security money into privatized accounts means less money to pay 
current and future benefits.
  � Every serious privatization proposal raises the Social Security 
retirement age to 70. That might be fine if you're a Washington special 
interest lobbyist but it is incredibly unfair to blue-collar Americans with 
tough, physical jobs, or for African Americans and Latinos with lower life 
expectancies.
  � Privatization means gambling with your retirement security. There is 
probably an appropriate place for a little stock market risk in retirement 
planning  but it isn't Social Security. Privatization exposes your entire 
retirement portfolio to stock market risks  and the risk that you'll 
outlive any of your jeantodd@example.net. You can't outlive your Social 
Security benefit.
  � So who does benefit? Wall Street. Giant financial services firms have 
been salivating for decades over the prospect of taking over Social 
Security. Wall Street would make billions of dollars in profit by managing 
the privatized accounts  money that would come directly from your 
benefits.
  � Action is urgently needed today. President Bush and Republican leaders 
in Congress are joining forces with the financial services industry for a 
major campaign to convince the public there is a major crisis and pressure 
members of Congress to vote for privatization. Action is needed now before 
it is too late. Please sign MoveOn's petition to protect Social Security at 
the link below.
<url>
Thanks for doing this."
{'source': 'USENET', 'other_information': '{"reply_count": 5, "forum_name": "alt.politics.democrat.20141122.mbox"}', 'file': 'data/output/usenet-alt.politics.parquet'}